Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PC 05-16-23 V TNF M* • 1 .- City of f C Carmel \ �N p \DIA CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 16, 2023 I MEETING MINUTES Location: Council Chambers Room,2nd Floor,Cannel City Hall Members Present: Adam Campagna,Dubbie Buckler,Leo Dierckman,Brad Grabow(President),Josh Kirsh,Sue Westermeier, Christine Zoccola Members Absent:Adam Aasen,Jeff Hill Staff Present: Alexia Lopez,Rachel Keesling,Mike Hollibaugh,Joe Shestak Legal Counsel:Aly McGrath,Sergey Grechukhin Time of Meeting:6:00 PM Declaration of Quorum:President Grabow: 7 members present,we have a Quorum. Approval of the previous Meeting Minutes:A Motion made by Kirsh and seconded by Zoccola to approve the Apri 118,2023 PC meeting minutes. Approved 7-0,absent Aasen,Hill. Communications,Bills,Expenditures,&Legal Counsel Report:Bruce Donaldson,Barnes&Thornburg LLP 1. Plan Commission Resolution PC-05-16-23-a: CRC Resolution No.2023-15 —amend both the Cannel Downtown Economic Development Area and the City Center RDA Declaratory Resolution Dierckman: Will this come before the Plan Commission(PC)for review and approval?Alexia Lopez: It's zoned C2,so it would be reviewed by CRC and the PC Hearing Officer. 11/ occola: Any negative impact to the allocation areas that these were in and now being moved out?Bruce Donaldson: There as no TIFF being generated here so no negative impact now. A Motion made by Buckler and seconded by Campagna to adopt PC-05-16-23-a. Approved 7-0, absent Aasen,Hill. Reports,Announcements& Department Concerns: Alexia Lopez 1. Outcome of Projects at Committees a. Commercial Committee: i. Docket No. PZ-2022-00238 ADLS: Tru Hotel Cannel—Sent to May 16 PC w/Fay.Recommend. ii. Docket No. PZ-2023-00072 V: UDO Sec. 5.21 Street trees required,No trees reqst.—Approved. b. Residential Committee:No items. c. Committee of the Whole:Docket No. PZ-2022-00172 PUD: Conner Prairie PUD Rezone—date set for Tuesday, May 23,2023 at 6 PM. Public Hearings Grabow: Explained the Rules of Procedure for a public hearing in front of the Plan Commission(PC). 2. Docket No.PZ-2023-00014 PUD: Andrews PUD Rezone. The applicant seeks PUD/Planned Unit Development rezone approval to allow a new neighborhood consisting of 46 townhomes and 14 two-family dwellings. The site is located at 4411 E. 146th St.and is zoned Rl/Residence.Filed by Jim Shinaver and Jon Dobosiewicz of Nelson&Frankenberger on behalf of Schafer Development,LLC. Ietitioner:Jon Dobosiewicz • With me tonight to answer any questions are Aaron Schafer, Dave Compton,Rex Ramage,and Jim Shinaver • We are proposing a for sale community of townhomes and two-family dwellings • Presented site location map, Development Patterns Map of the Comprehensive Plan, Site Plan, Elevations of Townhomes, Elevations of Two-Family homes, Photos of Amenities 1 Plan Commission Minutes 5-16-23 • Typical corridor is shown on 146th Street and townhomes are listed as a good fit for this site as it would keep it residential use in the area and offers moderate density • Wet pond will be located in the southeast corner of the site for detention • Tree preservation will be provided along the perimeter of this development • Access will be from 146th Street,and street connectivity from Gray Oaks subdivision • Additional stub streets will be constructed to the east and west for connection to future development • Sale prices will range from the 500k • Pulte homes is the builder,and 4-side architecture will be required,mostly of masonry building materials • Amenities will include a dog park,and community gardens • We will continue to work with Staff on any open items including pedestrian connectivity and documenting tree preservation and open space areas. • We will continue our discussion at the June 6 Residential Committee Public Comments: Tom Perkins,Tom Paganelli Law Group: I'm representing the residents of Gray Oaks subdivision. This is a higher density proposal than what exists on the south side of 146th Street. Structure and infrastructure problems can occur with this high- density proposal. We have concerns with drainage and traffic.Adding more density will further compound these issues. This is the 2"d proposal for this site.In 2016 there was a residential redevelopment proposal that was eventually withdrawn due to onsite drainage issues. This is not an appropriate place for this type of housing and density. There are unknowns in this proposal,and we ask you to suspend the rules of procedure to reopen the public hearing at a later meeting when more information is presented. Jane Gates,Gray Oaks: I have been a Civil Engineer for over 34 years. We have 40 lots in Gray Oaks. The proposed development will create traffic problems.The Petitioner's traffic report did not address the impact of traffic in Gray Oaks. The study says 23%of the outgoing traffic would make a right on 146th and do a U-turn at light at Gray Road. We don't believe someone would do that. We have funded our own traffic study and asked the developer to conduct another traffic study on how traffic would be rerouted in Gray Oaks.Construction traffic has not been addressed in this proposal. What are the requirements for an access point?We believe the stub street Gray Oaks Court would be the main access point for this ne development. Carrie McMichael, Gray Oaks: I would like to address the detention pond issues and stormwater drainage. We are concerned about the impact of the proposed detention on our existing ponds. Salsbery Brothers is to the north of us,and we discovered the runoff of chemicals into our detention.In 2016 a developer proposed 20 single-family development and the City required a drainage report at that time. That developer withdrew their proposal,and we asked the current developer to provide us with a drainage report. We have questions and concerns about how proper drainage standards will be applied to this new development. We ask this property remain R-1 zoning,anything higher in density will impact the drainage. Kevin Buchheit,Krieg DeVault LLP: I'm not here to speak for or against this matter. I want to establish a public record for Salsbery Brothers Landscaping.A copy of this letter is in the Laserfiche docket. If Andrews PUD is approved,we want to make any future homeowner aware of these situations not obtained within property lines created by the operations of the landscape company such as noises,dust, large truck traffic,and overnight security lighting. We think it's important for future residents of this undeveloped parcel to be fully aware of this. Josh Marraccini, Stafford Place HOA: They advertise this development as a 55 and plus neighborhood, and there are no rules to establish this. We worry that children will be present here and they have not proposed a playground or park. We are concerned that they will come to use the Stafford Place park which would have a high impact on our playground equipment, and we our HOA would bear the costs of any necessary repairs or replacement of equipment. Rebuttal to Public Comments: Jon Dobosiewicz: • Planning Staff and we believe this is an appropriate location for townhomes and two-family dwellings. • We will meet with the City Engineer on the traffic study.The traffic engineer presents the scope of the study not the Petitioner. We can discuss this further at the Committee meeting. We can offer commitments for construction traffic to only use access at 146h Street. • Petitioner will provide more details for the site's drainage requirements per the Cannel Ordinance during the Development Plan(DP)process if our rezone proposal is approved by City Council. 2 Plan Commission Minutes 5-16-23 • The City Engineer directed us of our access points off of 146th Street and Gray Oaks Court. • We met with Salsbery Brothers Landscaping Company. I agree with the comments of Kevin Buchheit,and we will include those in our information to future homebuyers I • Pulte believes this development is attractive to empty nesters but not restricted to families. We will incorporate HOA rules against property owners having basketball hoops,trampolines,and other kid outdoor toys in their yard. Department Report: Alexia Lopez • The Comp Plan shows this area along 146th as a typical corridor and would allow expanded housing options or limited commercial as long as they are consistent with the character of adjacent patterns • The Comp Plan supports the variety of housing types,and mixture of land uses,promoting housing types that support aging in place,and guides development to protect single-family neighborhoods from dissimilar adjacent uses with respect to scale of buildings, lighting,noise, and other incompatible impacts • Building a residential neighborhood adjacent another residential neighborhood is a compatible land use • Transitions to put in place include larger setbacks to the south,and two-story height of homes • The developer has included rear loading housing types,variety in streetscape,a well-connected street system,and proving open spaces such as a community garden and dog park • Staff recommends this is sent to the June 6 Residential Committee for further review and discussion Committee Comments: Zoccola: There's no language in the PUD that states this is an empty nester. I would rather plan to what it's going to be.If families are allowed,I want to see a park.I would like to see detached single-family homes instead of two-family homes.I would like to see a reduction in the density.We have had a lot of these types of developments come up recently. This isn't something new in Cannel. I want to see more details and color pallets on the townhomes. I want an Arborist to do an inventory of the existing trees. I want to see a better landscape plan. If the connection road is done,and I want to see the landscape matched as it is on the Gray Oaks side. uckler: I would like to see two connections off of 146th Street instead of the connection at the SW corner at Gray Oaks.I ould like to see more tree buffers at the SE corner. I want to see assurances of this being a 55 and older community.Jon obosiewicz: Presents Site Plan. The Hamilton Co.Highway Dept.told us that the access off 146th Street had to be placed farther west from Gray Road. Westermeier: I want to see street-views from 146th Street.Relook at the amenities for your target buyers. Where is the overflow parking located?How many parking spaces?What are the limiting factors on the power line easement? The anti- monotony wasn't clear in the PUD. Can you provide other places where this product has been built?Will you include a rental-clause statement in the PUD?Have you met with the Gray Oaks residents?How will the streets run throughout this entire area, such as school buses,delivery trucks,etc.? Jon Dobosiewicz: The townhome product has only been built in Delaware. I will provide pictures.We met twice with the Gray Oaks residents. Dierckman: I want to see proposal down to 25-30 homes.All of these comments about future problems from this development are based on the proposed density.Are you willing to commit to 55 and older with townhomes?Jon Dobosiewicz: We do not want to place any age restrictions on this development. Kirsh: I'm not in love with this proposal.The connection to the south has always been platted as a stub street. I spoke to the Fire Marshall,and he said it's a circle(Gray Oaks Ct.)so a firetruck can do a proper turn around. The Salsbery property is a problem that will not go away. It's not compatible being directly adjacent to residential.Adding a playground here should be a requirement since 55 and older have grandchildren. Grabow: Look at the architecture of the duplexes. I don't like the lap side on the first story.Intermix the lap side with other building materials. End units of the duplexes,regardless of which gable option,you should break up the expanse of the pho- econd story with a window,vent,or different building material. Provide examples of the color pallets and rear elevations of e duplexes.A water source should be provided at the dog park and community garden. Provide a storage shed for gardening ols. We need better landscape requirements. What does the Gray Oaks Court connection provide?What's the balance act of is?What type of housing product is best suited along 146t'Street?Jon Dobosiewicz: We reached out to the City Engineer to be present tonight and at the June 6 Residential Committee meeting. We can provide the traffic ratio difference between single-family and multi-family housing types. 3 Plan Commission Minutes 5-16-23 A Motion made by Westermeier and seconded by Dierckman to send Docket No.PZ-2023-00014 PUD to the June 6 Residential Committee with it coming back to the full Plan Commission for a final recommendation. Approved 7-0,absent Aasen,Hill. 3. Docket No.PZ-2023-00070 DP/ADLS: BJ's Wholesale Club. The applicant seeks site plan and design approval for BJ's Wholesale Club building with fuel/gas station.The site is located at 14480 Lowes Way. It is zoned PUD/Planned Unit Development(Z-681-23, 146th&Keystone Ave.PUD, as amended)and is partly in the SFHA/Special Flood Hazard Area. Filed by Marc LaVoie,PE, of BJ's Wholesale Club,Inc. Petitioner: Gene Biermann,Kite Realty Group—Property Owner: • With me tonight to answer any questions are Mark Jenkins(Kite),Marc LaVoie(BJ's),Murray Clark(Faegre Drinker),Jason Carr(Fuel Engineer), Steve Fehribach(Traffic Engineer) • The PUD Amendment was approved in March and worked out a lot of details with PC and City Council(CC) • This property will consist of a 100,000 sq ft building with a separate fuel center • We will relocate the existing detention ponds and provide underground stormwater detention • A slip lane will be added at the existing roundabout and a right turn only out provided on the south portion of site • We have worked with Staff and have addressed most of their comments. We will provide more information on the screening of the rooftop mechanical units. Public Comments: None Department Report: Rachel Keesling • We have been working with the Petitioner and will revise the items not met in the Department Report • Proposed gas station and underground storage protection has been reviewed by Carmel Engineering • 393 parking spaces will be provided after some landscaping additions • David Littlejohn approved the bike parking locations,but would like some adjustments were made to make sure there's enough room for e-bikes and cargo bikes • The Petitioner will provide additional information of the screening of the rooftop equipment • The design of the building meets the PUD requirements • The Petitioner will provide lighting materials and plan,so it matches the existing Lowes lighting requirements • Staff recommends this is continued at the June 6 Commercial Committee with them having final approval Committee Comments: Kirsh: I would echo on the Active Transportation comments and that you provide enough room for cargo and e bike parking. I would like you to add a covered area for bike parking. What are your thoughts on drivers making an illegal left turn out of the right turn only exit on the southeast side. Gene Biermann: We have been working with the Engineering Department and we are incorporating a raised street median in this area. Grabow: What's the extra space provided along the cargo load-in zone look like?What do the pedestrian markings look for in the east and west parking lots?How do people safely get back to their cars?Look at raised pedestrian crosswalks or pedestrian markings for them to follow. How do the fuel stations work?Gene Biermann: Presented site plan. We have 35-ft drive aisles around the perimeter of the building for customers who are picking up larger items. Marc LaVoie: Fueling will be for members only. Members can pay at the pump or pay with cash to the fuel station attendant. A Motion made by Zoccola and seconded by Westermeier to send Docket No.PZ-2023-00070 DP/ADLS to the June 6 Commercial Committee with them having final voting authority.Approved 7-0,absent Aasen,Hill. 3. Docket No.PZ-2023-00086 PV: LOR Development Partial Plat Vacation. 4. Docket No.PZ-2023-00087 PP: Rangeline Subdivision Primary Plat. 5. Docket No.PZ-2023-00088 SW: UDO Sec.6.15-10% Min.Open Space,0%qualifying open space requested. 6. Docket No.PZ-2023-00089 SW: UDO Sec. 6.15-10 ft.Wide Min.Perimeter Landscaping,0 ft.requested. 4 Plan Commission Minutes 5-16-23 The applicant seeks a partial plat vacation,a new primary plat,and two design standards waivers to remove the LOR development from the original single-family subdivisions and plat it as its own urban,commercial subdivision with 14 lots. The site is located at 175 South Rangeline Road and is zoned C-2/Mixed Use.Filed by Jim Shinaver and Jon Dobosiewicz of Nelson&Frankenberger on behalf of the LOR Corporation. Ietitioner: Jon Dobosiewicz • Presented Site Location Map, Plat Vacation, Primary Plat • Adam Hill of LOR and Jim Shinaver of Nelson&Frankenberger are here to answer questions • Received DP/ADLS approval from PC Hearing Officer • The 11 townhomes will be sold individually on the 11 lots is the reason we are here tonight • We request the PC to suspend the Rules of Procedure in order to vote and approve these items tonight Public Comments: Diana McAndrews,Indie Coffee Roasters,220 E.Main Street. I am the business owner to the east.We couldn't do a patio to front of our site.There are no street trees and a ton of traffic along this area. Save some of the greenspaces.Can you plant more trees off-site?I had to put trees up at my business. Deadlock traffic occurs at 4pm every day. Rebuttal to Public Comments: Jon Dobosiewicz: • Our PV request is to remove the existing lot lines of the former alley ways and parcels.The alley ways were vacated by the BPW last week. • Presented landscape plan, a landscape strip will be provided in front of the townhomes along 13'Ave and Supply street. We cannot provide a 10-ft wide landscape strip along Rangeline Road and Main Street. Street trees will be planted within the ROW,but it's not the required 10-ft wide landscape strip. Department Report: Alexia Lopez • The DP/ADLS was approved on April 6,2023 through the CRC and PC Hearing Officer review process I • We are here tonight to separate this lot into 1 lot for the commercial building and parking,and 11 lots for the 11 townhomes so they can be sold individually • All standards for this commercial subdivision are met except for the standard waivers they are requesting • This site is considered an urban in-field development,and landscaping is shown along the perimeter and street trees, just not enough to meet the requirements of the UDO • We asked if there should be an ingress/egress easement on Lot 1 to ensure the townhomes can access their garages • We recommend the PC votes to suspend their rules of procedure and approve this item tonight Committee Comments: Kirsh: I'm seeing about 25 trees being proposed. Trees will be on all four sides of this block.9 trees currently exist. Landscaping is being proposed adjacent to residential,but none along Rangeline facade,as we currently see in this area. Zoccola: I'm glad to see the townhomes were moved back from the street,since the original proposal, so some landscaping can be added adjacent to the existing residential. Westermeier: Could we discuss Staff comment on the ingress/egress easement?Jon Dobosiewicz: We can verbally commit on the secondary/final plat to identify the ingress/egress and the mechanism by which we regulate it and how everyone who uses this easement as access,maintains it. A Motion made by Dierckman and seconded by Campagna to suspend the Rules of Procedure and to approve Docket Nos.PZ-2023-00086-00089. Approved 7-0,absent Aasen,Hill. Old Business I1. Docket No.PZ-2022-00238 ADLS: Tru Hotel Carmel. The applicant seeks design approval for a new,five story, 126 room hotel on 1.13 acres. DP approval was granted under Docket No. 19060018 DP and Use Variance approval was granted under 18050007 UV. The site is located at 12164 North Meridian St., immediately north of the Ritz Charles.It is zoned MC/Meridian Corridor and is not within any overlay district.Filed by Nathan Winslow of American Structurepoint on behalf of the owner,Dora Hotel Group. 5 Plan Commission Minutes 5-16-23 Petitioner: Nathan Winslow: • With me tonight is Vince Dora,who is the owner and developer,can answer any of your questions • Presented updates made on the elevations,renderings,landscaping, and shared parking access • Our initial filings on our building renderings included bright vibrant colors and we have toned down our color pallet with our discussions with Staff. We reduced the glazing on the first floor due to the location of mechanical units. • We have added landscaping to the parking islands and medians to the west to help buffer to the adjacent residential Commercial Committee recap,Josh Kirsh • We had 5 Committee meetings,we worked on a lot of the items • We have comments on the shared parking scenario issue. The Ritz Charles has a shared parking agreement to the hotel to the south,and now an agreement with TRU. The Ritz Charles has changed their parking scenario over time and is storing their truck fleet on their site. Petitioner is 10 spots short,and we asked them to reach out to Franciscan Alliance to the north and see if they can work out some parking agreement. Department Report,Alexia Lopez • Staff has worked with the Petitioner on the architecture and building design • Long-term bike parking,exterior lighting,and additional trees to west side were addressed by the Petitioner • Per UDO,a Variance is required for the proposed number of parking spaces they are showing. It is 10 less than what is shown on the original DP.The UDO does allow for shared parking within 800 feet of the building footprint. • Staff recommends approval contingent upon a variance approval for the parking spaces,and final TAC approval Committee Comments: Dierckman: I was the one who voted no at the Committee level.No facility has a blue canopy for their bike parking facility and entrance. I don't like blue since it's strictly for the TRU hotel branding. We didn't like the branding and discussed this at the Committee.Westermeier: Do you have to have the blue?Vince Dora: I don't believe blue is required. Staff requested it to be another color to determine the entrance way since signage is not allowed. Dierckman: Make it white or brown.Not a color used in their branding. Westermeier: I would ask Staff to determine the revised color. Westermeier: Have you talked to any adjacent properties about the parking agreement?Vince Dora: I had a discussion today with Franciscan Health. They couldn't commit to a permanent shared parking agreement.Westermeier: Can you remove 10 rooms,and you would not need additional parking spaces?Vince Dora: We cannot remove the 10 rooms. Grabow: Help me understand where all the 130 plus parking spaces are at. Nathan Winslow:Presented site plan,the shared parking with Ritz is to the west, shared parking with medical office building is to the north,and the hotel will have its own internal parking lot. Grabow: Are all these parking spaces in the line of sight for your guests from the entrance?Nathan Winslow: That is correct.Grabow: People are going to park wherever they see a space,regardless of any parking agreement. Kirsh: The Ritz is making sharing parking spaces that aren't there since they have their 18 fleet trucks parked in those spaces. We are combining a bad situation with another parking situation.I don't agree with Staff that the parking will only be a problem a few times a year. Grabow: I agree. The Hyatt has already made a parking agreement. I don't think we have enough parking here for all 3 businesses.Dierckman: We have an issue with out of towners who visit the Ritz for an event and can't find a parking spot. It's a poor reflection on our community.Zoccola: Has anyone talked to the Ritz about parking? It's a bigger problem than just one business.Kirsh: DOCS feels the truck parking scenario is a Code Enforcement issue. The CRC approached the Ritz about a parking garage,and it didn't get anywhere. A Motion made by Dierckman and seconded by Zoccola to approve PZ-2022-00238 ADLS with the condition the Petitioner works with Staff on a neutral color for the canopy entrance and bike parking area,all TAC comments are addressed,and contingent upon the approval from the BZA for the variance needed for parking spaces. Motion fails 5-2,Zoccola,Buckler,absent Aasen,Hill. A Motion made by Dierckman and seconded by Campagna to deny PZ-2022-00238 ADLS. Approved 6-1,Buckler,absent Aasen,Hill. Meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m. I i J4,4t4 -z(--9,1 5q - ____. Joe `/stak PC Secretary Brad Grabow President 6 Plan Commission Minutes 5-16-23